Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 11:37:35 +0100 From: "Anthony Atkielski" <anthony@atkielski.com> To: "setantae" <setantae@submonkey.net>, <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: home pc use Message-ID: <00d201c171af$61dccb80$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <3BF9B12B.3D521A4D@nycap.rr.com> <20011119220243.A268@prayforwind.com> <009a01c171a9$4eedbee0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <E1667rO-0002md-00@mrvdom03.schlund.de> <00cd01c171ac$ca0fa0e0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <20011120102625.GB75402@rhadamanth>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ceri writes: > Running back up the thread, I can only imagine that you mean > ``they all crash''. No, I mean that they are all overcomplicated and bloated, compared to non-GUI systems. There is no such thing as a simple GUI with Windows-equivalent functionality. And complex GUIs have more of a tendency to crash; occasionally they make take the OS with them, depending on their design and the design of the OS. > That's simply not true. It's absolutely true. There's no such thing as a system that never crashes. GUIs tend to crash a lot more than non-GUIs, because of their complexity. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00d201c171af$61dccb80$0a00000a>